Drug WarRant Saturday, December 17, 2005 Another open thread So much going on, I wish I had time to post right now. The Agitator is still working the Cory Maye story. The converstaion with DAMMAD's Steve Steiner continues at Dare Generation Diary Federal Judge Calls DEA's View of Hemp 'Asinine' (no kidding!) Feingold notes that the sneak and peak provisions of the Patriot Act are mostly used to go after drug cases. (It's not really about terrorism -- it's about going after our own citizens.) Add the fact that a meth bill was added to the Patriot Act, and it becomes sickeningly transparent that the politicians don't really care about terrorism, but like having it around to use as a club to scare people into giving up rights. At the same time, several major media sources revealed that the Bush administration may have been illegally spying on American citizens for several years, and Congress is asking for an investigation. Perhaps in part because of this, the Patriot Act extension was temporarily derailed yesterday as the Senate failed to invoke cloture (the ending of discussion), but Frist at the last minute switched his vote to no (knowing it was losing) so he can bring it up for a vote again at any time. There will likely be some arm twisting going on. What will happen? Is it possible for the American public to rise up and say "We won't give up our rights any longer."? 7:45:40 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] Friday, December 16, 2005 Blind spot Mark Kleiman misses it again. He's at a conference on "drug markets and violent crime." He reports: Most interesting new idea: In New York City, where selling cocaine is a felony but selling cannabis or untaxed cigarettes is a misdemeanor, [intensive] street-level drug law enforcement has succeeded in driving the cocaine market indoors, resulting in a substantial decrease in violence. However, dealers in pot and smuggled cigarettes aren't afraid of the cops, so they have kept doing business outdoors. Result: substantial violence around sales of pot and untaxed cigarettes. (As usual, the violence is often ascribed to "turf battles" or business disputes, but in fact turns out mostly to be routine interpersonal disputes among angry young men with guns.) Now this is interesting. And it's fascinating to see cigarettes in this equation, as New York has one of the most (if not the most) drastic cigarette taxes in the country. New York State is 8th in the country with $1.50 per pack in taxes, and New York City adds an additional$1.50, bringing it to $3 per pack in taxes. But now Mark tries to oddly use the cigarette example as a way to stop... well... people like me. [Note to supporters of replacing drug prohibition with taxation and regulation: the untaxed-cigarette problem suggests one limit to that strategy, since a high tax can generate as nasty an illicit market as a prohibition does.] Does that suggest perhaps that the amount of tax has to be taken into consideration? I mean, Mark even said it: "...since a high tax..." Not when you've got a blind spot that you can drive a truck through. Even while admitting both the "high tax" and the "one limit" qualifiers, he dismisses legalization and regulation out-of-hand. His conclusion? The right policy response to the problem isn't obvious. Making it a felony to sell pot or untaxed cigarettes seems extreme. But how else can those dealers be forced to keep their heads down, thus avoiding violence and neighborhood disruption? The right policy response isn't obvious? Yeah, it sure is tough to figure out. Let's see... Strict Prohibition: Too extreme. Light Prohibition: Doesn't get them off the streets. Extemely High taxation: Encourages black markets. ???: Nope. Mark can't quite come up with anything to put in that fourth option. (Here's a hint, Mark. There are many places in the country where cigarette smuggling isn't a black-market item. You might want to take a look at what happens when the tax rates aren't extreme.) 1:28:58 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] Wednesday, December 14, 2005 What message are we sending to the children? Here's a request for input from all of you. One of the most annoying tricks used by drug prohibitionists is the old "What message would that send to the children?" used in opposition to any drug policy reform, usually when the facts are against them. I would like to put together a page of actual messages that we send to children by continuing prohibition as it exists. Things like... "Lying is OK when adults are talking about drugs." "Our interest in what's good for the family is less important than our desire to punish." "If you make a mistake regarding drug use, we'd rather have you die from it than have information that might save your life." "If you make a mistake regarding drug use, we're going to make sure that your friends are too afraid to get help that might save you." "If you're going to use drugs, we want to make sure that you get them from a criminal, with uncertain purity and dosage." "We're really hoping that heroin addicts will get HIV and hepatitus from shared needles and die. That's why we won't allow needle exchange." "You have no rights. We can come and test your blood or your urine or search you whenever we feel like it. You're property." "We use sick people as a tool for our political purposes. We don't care whether they are in pain or die from a lack of medicine." "We sit in Washington drinking martinis and thinking up ways to destroy the lives of kids who like to smoke pot." "We'll destroy the livelihoods of poor farmers and decimate their crops in order to make the drug dealers and drug warriors richer." In comments, add your own, or adjust the wording of some that I've given. 10:47:16 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] Open Thread I've still got a few more days of craziness to finish up the semester with finals and a trip to Chicago with the Madrigal Singers for their 50th Anniversary (they'll be performing at the Chicago Cultural Center on Saturday Night and the Palmer House Restaurant on Sunday morning. So, sorry for the lack of posts, but you know what to do. Dare Generation Diary has been doing great, so read them regularly (and Libby at Last One Speaks and Jeralyn at TalkLeft). And of course Radley Balko's posts on Cory Maye have shaken up the entire blogosphere, from Atrios to Instapundit (it would be nice if more of them were discussing the issue of drug raids rather than focusing solely on home self-defense). The media has actually been reporting the fact that the government is being sued to allow additional marijuana growing for research purposes. Of course, that's something we've been talking about here for months. They trial was on hiatus and has started up again. The media is also, unusually, continuing to report the GAO's trashing of Plan Colombia. Could it be that it won't be swept under the rug this time? Discuss. 10:27:53 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment [] Monday, December 12, 2005 DEA raids 13 medical marijuana dispensaries in San Diego Link SAN DIEGO [^] Federal agents fanned out across San Diego County on Monday, executing simultaneous search warrants on 13 medical marijuana dispensaries that have been selling pot to sick and dying patients. No one was arrested on suspicion of drug-dealing, officials said, but agents seized dozens of pounds of high-grade marijuana along with equipment, computers, patient files and other materials inside the storefront offices. In most cases, the agents arrived unannounced with guns drawn. They handcuffed employees and ran background checks on both workers and patients. They used drug-sniffing dogs to seek out marijuana and carted away computers and other equipment in trucks and sport-utility vehicles. Americans for Safe Access is organizing a protest of these raids: If you live in the San Diego area: We are asking all local medical cannabis supporters to rally in opposition to these raids at noon tomorrow, Tuesday, December 13th in front of the San Diego federal building, 880 Front Street, San Diego. ASA activists are also holding an emergency meeting tonight at 9:00p.m. at Twiggs Coffee House, 4590 Park Blvd., San Diego. If you live outside of the San Diego area: We are asking all medical cannabis supporters to rally in opposition to these raids at noon on Wednesday, December 14th in front of your local federal building. Please contact Rebecca immediately at rebecca@safeaccessnow.org if you plan to organize one of these rallies so we can post the information on our website. 8:11:51 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []